Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Monday, January 25, 2016

This Idaho patient, who is among the working poor and earns too little to make a higher payment or to pay her medical bill in one lump sum, and too much to qualify for Federal or state assistance, is making a $50.00 monthly payment on the $2,500 she owes. The physician's monthly interest charge on the debt is $50.30. At this rate, she will never be free of this debt and will be indebted for life.

Here’s the documentation, from an invoice sent this month of January (2016):

Click on each screenshot to enlarge:

Above: a closeup of the interest charge and payment amount

The invoice itself (with the name of the patient and identification redacted)

_______________

The churches are silent on this crime of theft via interest, and mostly silent concerning the Money Power which rules our nation as a direct result of the enormous profits reaped from this weapon of parasitic usury against the working poor.

Is there a reason why the Times has not reported the January 19 statement of Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon that he prefers that ISIS take over Syria, if it is a choice between ISIS and Iranian forces?

As you know, if ISIS were to conquer Syria, the Christian and Alawaite populations in that country would be nearly exterminated.

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

The Wall Street Journal reported in March, 2015 that the Israeli military has been treating wounded al-Nusra terrorists linked to al-Qaida, and then sending them back into the Golan Heights to battle Syria's army and Hizballah. The Israeli government has long provided aid and support in the Golan Heights to the al-Nusra terrorists. Gilad Sharon, son of late Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, is on record stating that an ISIS takeover in Syria would offer an opening for Israelis to acquire the Golan Heights permanently.

Israeli defense minister: "If I had to choose between Iran and ISIS, I’d choose ISIS"

Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alonISIS “is not a threat for us."

Washington Post, Jan. 19 — Speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies’ (INSS) conference in Tel Aviv on Jan. 19, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon made a bold statement: If he had to choose between Iran and the Islamic State, he told the audience, he’d “choose ISIS.”

Ya’alon reasoned that Iran had greater capabilities than the Islamic State and remained the biggest threat for Israel. He argued that if Syria were to fall to one of the two powers, he would prefer it were the Islamic State rather than Iran or Iran-backed groups. “

...He also added that Israel shared common interests with the regional Sunni Muslim powers, who were also threatened by the Shia Muslim Iran.

...The comment did seem to highlight a widespread belief in Israeli defense circles that the Islamic State is not a big problem for Israel and that Iran and Iran-backed groups like Hezbollah are of a bigger concern. This belief has been born out in policy: Israel has largely avoided any involvement in the fight against the Islamic State but has struck Hezbollah inside Syria.

...He has also dismissed the idea that the Islamic State was a direct threat to Israel. “ISIS is a new phenomenon, originating from al-Qaeda. This is not a threat for us,” he told The Washington Post’s Lally Waymouth in 2014.

Moshe Ya'alon is mocking every American murdered in San Bernardino and all the people slaughtered by ISIS in Paris, as well as all Christians, Kurds and Shiites who have been beheaded and massacred, along with Christian churches destroyed. The Israeli Defense Minister’s preference for the conquest of Syria by ISIS would mean the wholesale extermination of the Christian and Alawaite population. Why isn’t his genocidal preference for the worst of all Islamic terrorist organizations front page news in the U.S.?

The Iranian Fars news agency reported on December 29, 2013 that the head of the Saudi intelligence service met with several senior Israeli security officials, including Tamir Pardo, the head of the Israeli Mossad. According to the report, the meeting took place in Geneva, Switzerland on November 27, 2013. Fars based its report on a whistleblower with access to Saudi classified information, who was named by the news agency as Mujtahid. According to Fars, he “is well connected with the inner circles of the Saudi secret service” and revealed the details of the meeting on his Twitter account. Mujtahid’s Tweet reportedly said that Prince Bandar and Israeli officials agreed on a number of crucial issues, including exercising stronger control over Syria’s Jihadist forces.

I am 74-years-old. I converted to the Roman Catholic Church at the age of 17 in the last year of the pontificate of Pope Pius XII. I did so because I was under the conviction that I had to accept and have faith that Jesus Christ was my savior, and I believed it. And I believed that I had to be a baptized member of his Church to have a chance of salvation. So I converted and was baptized in the Catholic Church, and then I was confirmed.

Over the years I have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to both Peters’ Pence (the pope’s own treasury about which you of course must be very familiar), and my local parish and diocese.

During that time I attended thousands of Masses, hundreds of holy hours and novenas, said thousands of rosaries, and made hundreds of trips to the Confessional.

Now in 2015 and 2016 I have read your words and those of your “Pontifical Commission.” You now teach that because I am a racial Jew, God’s covenant with me was never broken, and cannot be broken. You don’t qualify that teaching by specifying anything I might do that would threaten the Covenant, which you say God has with me because I am a Jew. You teach that it’s an unbreakable Covenant. You don’t even say that it depends on me being a good person. Logically speaking, if God’s Covenant with me is unbreakable, then a racial Jew such as I am can do anything he wants and God will still maintain a Covenant with me and I will go to heaven.

Your Pontifical Commission wrote last December, “The Catholic Church neither conducts nor supports any specific institutional mission work directed towards Jews…it does not in any way follow that the Jews are excluded from God’s salvation because they do not believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel and the Son of God.”

You are the Pontiff. I believe what your Commission teaches under your banner and in your name, and what you declared during your visit to the synagogue in January. As a result, I no longer see any point in getting up every Sunday morning to go to Mass, say rosaries, or attend the Rite of Reconciliation on Saturday afternoon. All of those acts are superfluous for me. Predicated on your teaching, I now know that due to my special racial superiority in God’s eyes, I don’t need any of it.

I don’t see any reason now as to why I was baptized in 1958. There was no need for me to be baptized. I no longer see why there was a need for Jesus to come to earth either, or preach to the Jewish children of Abraham of his day. As you state, they were already saved as a result of their racial descent from the Biblical patriarchs. What would they need him for?

In light of what you and your Pontifical Commission have taught me, it appears that the New Testament is a fraud, at least as it applies to Jews. All of those preachings and disputations to the Jews were for no purpose. Jesus had to know this, yet he persisted in causing a lot of trouble for the Jews by insisting they had to be born again, they had to believe he was their Messiah, they had to stop following their traditions of men, and that they couldn’t get to heaven unless they believed that he was the Son of God.

Consequently, you will be hearing from my lawyer. I am filing suit against the papacy and the Roman Catholic Church. I want my money back, with interest, and I am seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the psychological harm your Church caused me, by making me think I needed something besides my own exalted racial identity, in order to go to heaven after I die.

I am litigating as well over the time that I wasted that I could have spent working in my business, instead of squandering it worshipping a Jesus that your Church now says I don’t need to believe in for my salvation. Your prelates and clerics told me something very different in 1958. I’ve been robbed!

Sincerely,

Pinchus Feinstein

2617646 Ocean View Ave.

Miami Beach, Florida 33239

P.S. I'm transmitting this letter to Hoffman, an ex-AP reporter from New York, in the expectation that he will bring it to the attention of those who should know about it. I am transmitting it to him in the form of a dream, but nevertheless, it represents the feelings of many victims of your robber Church.—Pinch

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

There is one whose name is a synonym for genius and whose life was dedicated to honor and the exposure of fraud and imbecility. In one of those masterpieces of serendipity that Providence occasionally bestows upon us, the artist in mind was born on the same day and two years after another inestimable American luminary, Confederate General Robert E. Lee. On January 19, in the year 1809, Edgar Allan Poe (or Edgar A. Poe as he signed himself and preferred to be known), was born in Boston.

“Eddie” was not just a master of the short story. He invented the detective genre and its principles of ratiocination, with the debut of The Murders in the Rue Morgue. His detective fiction was more than entertainment; it was the training of the intellect in those powers necessary for apprehending the illusion and masquerade in life itself.

Poe was his own Dupin, in real life a cryptographer and in so far as we know, there was no code he was unable to break. He held a contest in a national magazine in which he challenged military men, diplomats and mathematicians to send in any coded message. He broke every one of the hundreds submitted. He also debunked Maelzel’s automaton and by reading the first seven pages of the initial installment of Charles Dickens immense, serialized novel Barnaby Rudge, Poe correctly predicted the entire plot and the solution to the riddle of Rudge’s identity, which Dickens, in flabbergasted amazement, confirmed as correct.

He is now regarded as not only the finest horror writer but the 19th century’s most astute literary critic, book-reviewer, and editor. He was also a philosopher, being the author of the magisterial treatise on the cosmos, Eureka.

If poetry is considered the highest of all the literary arts then Poe is the greatest of all such wordsmiths because he is our best American poet.

Any one of these achievements would merit for Poe the acclaim of his country but that all these were combined in one man whose birthdate in January is now mostly forgotten is our national disgrace.

Poe styled himself a ‘‘magazinist” for it was in magazines (what we today would term journals — thick, book-length publications consisting in hundreds of pages), that most of his writing first appeared.

He lived in an America bursting with youth and vitality. Coincidental with this was the astonishing literacy of Americans (almost all of whom were products of one-room school houses or educated by their parents at home), and their commensurate ravenous hunger for the printed word.

In Philadelphia in 1850, where Poe resided for a time, that city alone supported seven daily morning newspapers, two evening daily newspapers and several weekly ones. In addition, those who could afford it usually subscribed to several literary, scientific and domestic magazines.

Our hero served as editor of the Southern Literary Messenger; Burton’s Gentlemen’s Magazine and Graham’s Magazine. He wrote for dozens of others. He was paid virtually nothing for his work and the Poe household, which included his child-cousin bride Virginia and her beloved mother, Maria (“Muddy”), existed in poverty for most of their lives.

Though his writing caused Graham’s Magazine to increase in circulation from 5,500 to 50,000, Poe’s income was measured in pennies. For Ligeia, the first science fiction story ever written, Poe was paid 50 cents a page. From January of 1837 to the summer of 1839 he averaged 16 cents a day for his writing.

He was forced to bear, in his words, the “sad poverty and the thousand consequent ills and contumelies which the condition of the mere magazinist entails upon him in America—where, more than in any other region upon the face of the globe, to be poor is to be despised.”

As one might sense from this snippet, Poe had his caustic side. It was said that he mistook his ink well for a bottle of prussic acid. He was no Shrine-hall booster of the American Republic. Though poverty-stricken, he was part of this country’s natural aristocracy. He absolutely repudiated democracy. In Mellonta Tauta, he described the notion that all men are created equal as “the queerest idea conceivable” and he termed democracy, “a very admirable form of government — for dogs.” He had only scorn for what he saw as America’s foolish millennial enthusiasm for the products of technology and its “money-grubbing, democratic rabble.” In The Thousand and Second Tale of Scheherazade, he mocked the belief that technological progress can improve the human condition. He observed that in America, “a man of large purse has usually a very little soul he keeps it in. The corruption of taste is a portion and a pendant of the dollar-manufacture.”

Despite his extreme candor and contempt for the mob, Poe never sought to confine the experience of beauty to a social or intellectual elite. He did not talk down to his readers, but offered them genuine training in aesthetic judgment and principles.

The cultivation of love and beauty was his alpha and omega. His devotion to the dead who he had loved was termed by a biographer, “mournful and never-ending remembrance.” Beauty was so important to him that he even wrote The Philosophy of Furniture and ranked it on par with his renowned critical poetic dicta, The Rationale of Verse. He worshiped at this shrine with every breath he took and fashioned a spirituality out of death or more accurately, from the characteristics of supernal beauty which he identified with another world beyond the material. This was most exquisitely realized in the feminine form and manifested, in Poe’s aesthetic, in the whitest of white skin and large-orbed eyes; in women possessed of an ethereal beauty: Madeline in The House of Usher and the eponymous Ligeia.

He was an amateur astronomer (as well as a skilled lithographer, carpenter and gardener), and highly conscious of the position of celestial objects (his favorite star was Arcturus). There are scenes from his life in which he is found under the evening sky in situations where young women and his poetry would soon adorn and complete the tableau.

When Poe is presented in academic course work in our citadels of ignorance, his views on politics and the American system are generally avoided. It is often assumed that Poe was something of a conservative adjunct of that system. He was in fact a terrible enemy of the Establishment, a man of implacable resentments, sarcasm and rage, as anyone who has read, Diddling Considered as One of the Exact Sciences, or Hop Frog, will attest.

Poe was in combat at one time or another with half the literary and social establishment of his day. Many of his stories are from the point of view of persons of prodigious intellectual power who reverence beauty, build monuments to their own inordinate self-esteem and are profoundly contemptuous of the “paltry commendations of mankind.”

In his nonfiction, and critical and journalistic writing, Poe used tactics of masquerade, self-debate and a type of literary ventriloquism to bitterly confound, harass and mock those he viewed as his tormentors. He had a passionate desire to hoax, mystify and sarcastically laugh at his enemies and would go to considerable lengths to achieve these ends. In this vein, Hop Frog and especially Diddling are largely autobiographical.

Poe paid the swindling overlords in kind. His was not the suicidal frontal charge of Pickett, but the savage jesting-justice of Montressor. In the Poesque, victory is inextricably bound to a final and private entertainment, “the grin.” With a Southerner’s gothic eye, he despised America’s democratic conceit because he foresaw in its earliest stirrings, the making of an easily manipulated mobocracy harnessed by secret societies to destructive ends.

His ideal, like that of many of the American patricians of his day, was Periclean antiquity, “the glory that was Greece, the grandeur that was Rome.” Poe was hailing not the democracy of the polis but the rigor of the Greek aesthetic. Politically he would have been more in line with classic Rome, like his friend Junius Brutus Booth.

He attacked Freemasonry subtly and symbolically in The Cask of Amontillado and Never Bet the Devil Your Head (in which the devil is depicted wearing a masonic apron). Like Roderick in The House of Usher, Poe viewed the modern world through the eyes of ancient lineage and tradition. He was descended of an old Norman family, the Le Poers; his grandfather was George Washington’s Quartermaster General during the American Revolution; his mother Eliza, who died of tuberculosis when he was not quite two-years-of-age, was a celebrated and beloved classical actress and singer.

Poe derided his birthplace, Boston, as the headquarters of the “Humanity Clique,” and intensely disliked New England abolitionism, optimism and belief in social progress. He took a dim view of minorities. In a parody of Longfellow’s awkward attempt to imitate Greek hexameters in English verse, he jeered at Judaics: “Why ask/who ever yet saw money made/ out of a fat old Jew or/ downright upright nutmegs/ out of a/ pine nut.” His Tale of Jerusalem depicts Judaic zealots in a fortress besieged by the Romans who are pulling up a desperately needed basket of what they think are provisions, only to discover a pig inside.

Poe’s adopted father who treated him cruelly, was the Freemason John Allan; a confidant of Judaic merchants. Legend has it that during an evening on the town in the company of Junius Booth, he and Poe played a cruel prank on a Judaic man and hung him from a spiked fence by “his breeches.”

He was not overly fond of the “American Negro.” In The Gold Bug, Legrand’s manumitted black servant Jupiter can’t tell his left eye from his right and is shown to be a superstitious moron. In The Journal of Julius Rodman, a black man is “ugly with swollen lips...protruding eyes, flat nose...double head.” Poe’s prejudice was of the equal opportunity type: according to his friend Mary Starr, he “didn’t like dark-skinned people” in general and that included swarthy whites.

His spirit was not very dissimilar from the arch-sensitive, highly strung, neurasthenic Roderick Usher, though in other respects he belied that caricature (his athleticism for instance — he was a powerful swimmer).

There is some likelihood that Poe was assassinated. At the very least his death should be regarded as suspicious, rather than a result of drink or exposure, which is the general conclusion advanced by the Establishment. He was in good health and not alcoholic in the early autumn of 1849. The esteemed engraver John Sartain testified that Poe was sober and well-dressed in this period. Poe repeatedly told Sartain in the months before his death that men were plotting to kill him. Nothing is known of the period from Sept. 26, when Poe boarded a steamship in Richmond for the trip to Maryland, to Oct 3. a week later, when he was discovered in Baltimore, semi-conscious and “strangely dressed.” His mother-in-law believed he had been severely beaten. On Oct. 7, 1849 at Baltimore’s Washington Medical College, Edgar A. Poe made his final journey, to the “Al Aaraaf” he had dreamed of and written about since a schoolboy in England.

If you visit his tomb in the Westminster Presbyterian churchyard at Fayette and Green streets in Baltimore you will not be alone. Many dozens gather there every January 19. Yet his former house in that city is in decay and museums dedicated to his legacy are seriously underfunded. In our high schools, if he is taught at all, he is presented as a horror story auteur. Teachers often assign students typical entries in his oeuvre, such as The Pit and the Pendulum, and delve no deeper into his darker, more complex and troubled tales.

Edgar A. Poe was not a “nice guy.” It’s unlikely he would have received a clean bill of mental health from any modern psychologist or yoga teacher, and our equality police (better known as the media) would have found some way to demonize or even jail him. As it is his image is pickled and mummified out of all recognition, consigned to a stereotype as a horror story writer who the masses think they know. In truth he little resembles this pop culture brand, a fact discerned by radical black writer Ishmael Reed. Though he smeared him by placing him inside a kind of “Knights of the Golden Circle” secret society that Poe abominated, Reed intuited (and sarcastically applauded) a sense that Edgar A. Poe was our nation’s terminal man: a pale aesthete haunting a House of Usher America where whites form an ever-shrinking minority, destined to act out the ultimate horror tale as specimens of an ever smaller Brahmin-like aristocracy, amid an alien diversity zoo.

And yet, even in the darkest penal hole there is always something to celebrate. In that spirit we lift a glass this day, commemorating the birth of our visionary kinsman; the extraordinary soul who wrote, “All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.”

Monday, January 18, 2016

Announcing Revisionist History Newsletter issue no. 82(An editorial follows this announcement)Did Stalin Want War With Germany in 1941?Hitler's Struggle against the Moloch of the Soviet Union: Options and ConsequencesMichael Hoffman’s controversial new study of Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union

Topics include: The Communist-Nazi Alliance, 1939-1941; The Role of Exterminationism in Leninism-Stalinism; NKVD Operations During Barbarossa, 1941-1942; The Commissar Order; Critique of Viktor Suvarov’s Stalin Attack Thesis; Adolf Hitler: British Agent?; Hitler, the German High Command and the Attempt to Conquer Moscow; Hitler’sGötterdammerungFatalism; The German Defeat in Russia; and more.

The following editorial was mailed to our subscribers with this issue:

Preserving Our Independence

By Michael Hoffman

With our current issue no. 82, “Did Stalin Want War With Germany?,” we again trespass in a forbidden border-region ruled off-limits by true believers who call themselves revisionists.

Though it is seldom applied to people on our side, the culture of victimhood is rife in our ranks. When we published Revisionist History newsletter no. 74, “Right Wing Myths with an Endless Shelf Life”, Belloc-Catholics were appalled that we had “victimized” them and their paragon, Hilaire Belloc.

When in issue number 80 we vindicated Gregor Strasser from the charge that he had conspired in the violent overthrow of Adolf Hitler, and showed that Hitler was guilty of having this eminent German assassinated, Hitler’s fans howled. We had victimized their demigod.

In both cases mature people who pride themselves on their ability to reason, joined the infantilized culture of victimhood which undermines the traditional virtues of comity and amity among scholars, marked by good-faith disagreement.

When our research turned up the fact that Mr. Belloc was an atrocious historian, and that Hitler had snuffed out one of the most virtuous German National Socialists of his generation, the victimhood culture sprang into action, as it does on liberal college campuses and among the politically correct; how ironic that it manifests even in our ranks.

None of those who felt victimized have offered any surfeit of evidence to overturn our research. Reactions ranged from “How dare you!,” to citing Leon Degrelle’s sadly absurd disinformation, Hitler Democrat, wherein the author libels his fellow Catholic Gregor Strasser, according to the dictates of the oft-recycled mendacity concerning Strasser’s murder. This is revisionist?

A substantial minority of our readers (in some cases, they are now former readers) crave, indeed seem to demand, disinformation when their own myths would otherwise be threatened by alternative data. They are deeply offended when we don’t play along. How does this attitude differ from the self-inflicted deception so prevalent in the rabbinic world?

Our editorial mission is to cultivate strong individuals of character who are motivated by truth-seeking as the highest aspiration of their lives, not a herd who process reality through a lens of Hitlerism, or Catholics who can’t spot their own transformation into a rabbinic simulacra. Those who come to us seeking vindication of their most revered historical and religious illusions, will be bitterly disappointed.

In place of mutual dogmatic denunciation and ideological rancor we recommend the standard of disagreement in good faith, with mutual good will toward those who dissent from our own cherished beliefs (we all have them, whether we are aware of it or not).

This good-faith disagreement should not be a tall order for revisionists, but it seems that some people pose as freethinking revisionists when they are actually Hitlerian or papalolatrous enthusiasts exploiting revisionism to advance their cultism.

We have no patience for such dissembling when it raises its head among Zionists, why then should we avoid exposing it in our own camp?

When challenged by facts, an authentic revisionist dutifully revises his or her views in the face of the new information. If he or she believes the challenge to be less than persuasive, the revisionist nevertheless graciously acknowledges the obligation of fellow revisionists to issue challenges to sacred cows. The genuine revisionist supports further research and exploration of taboo topics without limits on what can or cannot be expressed.

There are other publications which cater to the heavy baggage of the true-believer. Those who feel victimized by our dissenting truth mission are welcome to embrace those publications and writers more comforting to their delicate belief systems. We seek overcomers willing to face the future armed with facts that can withstand the assault of the enemy, not clichés and stereotypes useful mainly for preaching to the choir, with little potential for persuading those who are not already in the fold.

Throughout the history of rabbinic Talmudism, Judaic heretics who revealed anomalies in the rabbinic dogma were beaten, banished or killed. In the recent history of this newsletter, as we revealed anomalies in Right wing dogma, we have escaped beatings and death, but not boycotts, calumniating whispering campaigns and “exile” in the form of subscription cancellations and withdrawals of support.

It’s remarkable that so many alleged opponents of Judaism exhibit unmistakable rabbinic attitudes of hostility toward advancements in learning. What should be our response? Preserve our financial bottom line by tailoring our work to suit this mentality, or risk everything to advance research independent of any agenda?

At this juncture it is appropriate to acknowledge and thank our base of steadfast subscribers who are committed to sharing and sustaining our voyage of discovery. It is due to their dedication and support that we have been able to continue to publish this newsletter, which was founded as an organ for the rejection of processed thinking, and an entrée to a universe of audacious exploration that may yet yield a winning ideological strategy and political formula.

Since last autumn, when we announced our forthcoming study of Operation Barbarossa (the code name for Hitler’s invasion of Russia), readers have written letters and sent us books and articles, mostly in an effort to persuade us that the 1941 invasion was prudent, and absolutely necessary to the survival of NS Germany. Patently, readers care about what we think and what we publish, and that in itself is something. We in turn have read or at least perused everything that was sent, in addition to the research material which we gathered. Our conclusions will be found in issue 82.

Whether we have pleased or disappointed, delighted or enraged, is no concern of ours. Our hard core supporters value our independence; that’s why they subscribe and renew their subscriptions year after year — because learning pays dividends and truth matters — or at least the pursuit of it, when that pursuit refuses to tailor itself to an agenda.

We are weary of defeat, deception and delusion. To break free is the purpose of our writing. Such freedom is not easily won. It comes at great cost, like all that is precious and exquisite in this life, foreshadowing eternity.